Table 2 Basic distribution characteristics and administrative information of included systematic reviews (the HTA data were collected for this study; all other data are from Page et al. [1], i.e. the data collected for 300 systematic reviews for a single month in 2004 and 2014)
From: Nature and reporting characteristics of UK health technology assessment systematic reviews
Characteristic | 2004 n = 300 [1] | HTA 2004 n = 23 | HTA 2014 n = 30 | Cochrane 2014 n = 45 [1] | 2014 n = 300 [1] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of authors: Median and range a | 4 (1- > 7) | 4 (2–8) b | 4 (1–9) b | 4 (3–6) | 5 (4–6) |
Update of previous SR | - (18%) | 1 (4) | 2 (7) | 25 (56%) | 31 (10%) |
Type of SR | |||||
Therapeutic | 213 (71%) | 16 (70%) | 16 (53%) | 45 (100%) | 164 (55%) |
Diagnostics / prognostics | 23 (8%) | 5 (22%) | 10 (34%) | 0 | 33 (11%) |
Epidemiology | 38 (13%) | 2 (8%) | 1 (3%) | 0 | 74 (25%) |
Other (incl. methodological) | 46 (15%) | 0 | 3 (10%) | 0 | 29 (10%) |
Type of intervention | |||||
Pharmacological | - (47%) | 13 (57%) | 6 (20%) | 23 (51%) | 76/164 (46%) |
Non-pharmacological | - (38%) | 3 (13%) | 13 (43%) | 17 (38%) | 75/164 (46%) |
Both | NR | 1 (4%) | 2 (7%) | 5 (11%) | 13/164 (8%) |
Not applicable (e.g. diagnostic test) | NR | 6 (26%) | 9 (30%) | 0 | 0 |
Reporting guideline cited | NR | 5/23 (24%) | 19/30 (63%)c | 1 (2%) | 87 (29%) |
Cochrane methods used | NR | 1/23 (4%) | 4/30 (13%) | 45 (100%) | 138 (46%) |
Number of included studies | 16 | (1–170) [1–84] | 0–200 | 9 (4–17) | 15 (8–25) |
Number of included participants reported | 1112 | 2 only (2905–3909) | 5 only (201–34,082) | 1113 (421–2751) | 2072 (672–8033) |
Empty review (no eligible studies) | NR | 0 | 2 (7%) | 3 (7%) | 4 (1%) |
Meta-analysis performed | - (54%) | 11 (48%) | 15 (50%) | 32 (71%) | 189 (63%) |
Number of studies included in largest meta-analysis | NR | 4–17 (n = 11) | 2–35 (n = 15) | 6 (3–11) | 9 (6–17) |
Harms considered (excluding empty / diagnostic reviews; treatment reviews only) | - (75%) | 15/16 (94%) | 10/14 (71%) | 41 (91%) | 113/164 (69%) |
Economics (i.e. costs) considered | - (24%) | 0d | 0d | 7 (16%) | 23/172 (13%) |
SR or Meta-analysis mentioned in title / abstract | - (50%) | 23 (100%) | 30 (100%) | 15 (33%) | 254 (85%) |
Review registered | NR | 0/23 (0%) | 23/30 (77%) | 0 (0%) | 12 (4%) |
Protocol available | NR | 4/23 (17%) | 27/30 (90%) | 44 (98%) | 49 (16%) |
Protocol mentioned but not available | NR | 7/23 (30%) | 1/30 (3%) | NR | NR |
Conflicts of Interests reported | |||||
Review authors | NR | 23 (100%) | 30/30 (100%) | 45 (100%) | 260 (87%) |
Included studies’ authors | NR | 6/23 (26%) | 12/28 (43%) | 13/42 (31%) | 21/296 (7%) |
Source of funding | |||||
Not for profit | - (48%) | 23 (100%) | 30/30 (100%) | 38 (84%) | 142 (47%) |
For profit | - (2%) | 0 | 0 | 0 (0%) | 8 (3%) |
Mixed | - (6%) | 0 | 0 | 0 (0%) | 2 (1%) |
No funding | - (1%) | 0 | 0 | 5 (11%) | 39 (13%) |
Not reported | - (41%) | 0 | 0 | 2 (4%) | 109 (36%) |